Assuming that this success is driven by genes rather than environment, there is a rather obvious inference to make - black people are naturally better sprinters than white people. Indeed, it is an inference that seems obligatory, barring considerations of political correctness.

But here's the thing. This inference is not merely false - it is logically flawed. And it has big implications not merely for athletics, but for the entire issue of race relations in the 21st Century.

To see how, let us examine success not in the sprints but in distance running, for this is also dominated by black athletes. Kenya has won an astonishing 63 medals at the Olympic Games in races of 800m and above, 21 of them gold, since 1968. Little wonder that one commentator once described distance running as "a Kenyan monopoly".

But it turns out that it is not Kenya as a whole that usually wins these medals, but individuals from a tiny region in the Rift Valley called Nandi. As one writer put it: "Most of Kenya's runners call Nandi home."

Seen in this context, the notion that black people are naturally superior distance runners seems bizarre. Far from being a "black" phenomenon, or even a Kenyan phenomenon, distance running is actually a Nandi phenomenon. Or, to put it another way, "black" distance running success is focused on the tiniest of pinpricks on the map of Africa, with the vast majority of the continent underrepresented.

Apply that same logic to sprinting and a different tribe and you have your answer as to why black people are better sprinters than white people.

(Original post by InternetGangster)
I know this is extremely stereotypical, but I, and I'm sure a lot of other people have recognised the fact that black men generally seem to be better sprinters than whites. Your opinion?

It's not blacks in general, it's a few particular tribes from West Africa. Top white sprinters will happily trounce other tribes and East Africans in particular (who happen to be good long distance runners), but there is a small sub-group of West Africans who are especially good runners.

(It was also these people who ended up being taken to the Americas by the slave trade and make up the majority of good sprinters from these countries)

Many different black tribes originating from different parts of Africa are in fact scarcely related to each other, often having more heritage in common with different ethnicities like Europeans and Asians than other Africans. Blacks are not a single ethnicity, despite all having dark skin. (The dark skin is more due to the climate of the regions they have inhabited for millennia rather than ethnicity)

It's in their genetics, or at least - far more likely to be in their genetics than with other races. Black athletes, as well as any other race, generally have fast-twitch muscles fibres as this is immeasurably beneficial. And it's not "stereotypical" or "racist", it's a fact that black people are, on average, better at running and white people are, on average, better at swimming.

ps: white people are, on average, better at swimming because generally they have less dense bones and can move quicker in the water!

edit:

By the way, descendants of slaves are kinda genetically more advanced than what they would have been. To survive being a slave meant you were extremely tough and it was years of "natural selection" sped-up over a lesser time span. If you were weak, you probably would have died very soon after being caught...

^ That's just to add to some of the similar comments about the slave trade thing on here.

(Original post by pouryia)
That link means nothing? Are you suggesting its got nothing to do with muscle twitch fibers?

No, it does, but the point of the article was to show that there are way more terrible black athletes than good ones. So it's a combination of both.

Mr Z summed it up pretty well:

Many different black tribes originating from different parts of Africa are in fact scarcely related to each other, often having more heritage in common with different ethnicities like Europeans and Asians than other Africans. Blacks are not a single ethnicity, despite all having dark skin. (The dark skin is more due to the climate of the regions they have inhabited for millennia rather than ethnicity)

How do we know all blacks have fast twitch muscle fibers and not just the descendants of a select few tribes?

(Original post by Courtney05)
I dont think it was obvious...it was up to interpretation as are all jokes. It was not found funny by that person, or others like myself, but its not really worth mulling over any more.

(Original post by Wilfred Little)
So if I make a derogatory statement about white people on this forum and then claim I'm joking and people need to lighten up, that's fine, is it?

Use your common sense and choose your audience accordingly, you wouldn't tell jokes about black people in downtown Harlem would you?

I'm not some left-wing hippy, my sense of humour is very dark but there's a time and a place for it and a serious discussion amongst strangers is not it.

I've heard Jamaican sprinters have more Actinen A (a protein in their fast twitch muscles) giving them a better natural aptitude for sprinting. Apparently 70% of Jamaican athletes possess the gene which codes for a higher production of Actinen A, while only 30% of Australian athletes do (Glasgow Uni study).http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/0...uccess-no.htmlhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/oth...n-so-fast.html
this is an old, but interesting article, about how Jamaica's youth sprinting system.
I've also read some interesting things about how often black people have proportionally longer legs than other racial groups, and a higher mitochondria count in their cells, meaning they can synthesize ATP at a greater rate. Haven't seen any studies about that though.